Posted on 01/19/2006 3:35:07 AM PST by Mr170IQ
The intemperate - even rabid - response of the "evolution answers everything" crowd suggests a proof of a greater agenda.
Yet most people still believe God is the creator. Looks like the Darwinists still have work to do.
I think I've seen these points in action:
The Darwinist answer was immediate. Unfortunately, it was also illogical, personal, and unscientific. The main points are:
1. Intelligent Design is just Creation Science in a new suit (name-calling).
2. Don't listen to these guys, they're not real scientists (credentialism).
3. If you actually understood science as we do, you'd realize that these guys are wrong and we're right; but you don't, so you have to trust us (expertism).
4. They got some details of those complex systems wrong, so they must be wrong about everything (sniping).
5. The first amendment requires the separation of church and state (politics).
6. We can't possibly find a fossil record of every step along the way in evolution, but evolution has already been so well-demonstrated it is absurd to challenge it in the details (prestidigitation).
7. Even if there are problems with the Darwinian model, there's no justification for postulating an "intelligent designer" (true).
As a matter of fact, she's going on a school trip to a Creation conference tomorrow. More information at http://wwww.answersinGenesis.org.
That is quite an elaborate dissertation. However, I feel that the insertion of a divine or supernatural entity into natural affairs just plain goes beyond what should be taught in a science class.
'Of course scientists can't document every step of the historical process of evolution. That wouldn't be science anyway, it would be mere data collection.'
Doing a proper job of collecting data is part of the scientific method. Reducing, analyzing and interpreting it properly is the other part of the scientific method. When scientists have insufficient data to fill in the gaps left, they must then theorize (punny word in this case considering its root) what could fill in the gaps. However, they cannot insert non-scientific (i.e., non-natural) mechanisms or causal explanations to do this. Don't shoot the messenger trying to work within the bounds of her/his field of expertise, go instead after the left-leaning liberal loonies (L^4) trying to use it for their own selfish/immoral/power-hungry intentions.
God isn't trying to fool us, we are doing a good enough job on our own.
but why...
I think it's countering the scientific approaches to understand the world to much. It's more like propaganda then christianity.
"God isn't trying to fool us, we are doing a good enough job on our own."
I don't know about that one considering what Paul writes
IIThessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
All I have ever seen Creationism or ID do is criticize Darwinism. Finding flaws in Darwinism is NOT the same as proving Creationism or ID (and yes, I believe they are the same, just under different names). This is just more of the same.
In that entire screed, there is not one mention of any evidence in support of intelligent design, nor is there any mention of how to test for intelligent design. Whoever the author is, the sciecne train left the station before he could get on the platform. It's a propaganda puff piece with a lot of tired, old creationist B.S.
Here's an interesting read for Thursday morning.
Intelligent design isn't much of a help to you. The leaders of the ID movement believe in common descent.
That's not evidence, it's an assertion. Support it, and we can talk.
Card forgot one point:
0. It is an argument from incredulity, and is therefore a fallacy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.